DOCSLIB.ORG

Standard Missile: Guidance System Development

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Standard Missile: Guidance System Development ROBERT W. WITTE and ROBERT L. MC DONALD STANDARD MISSILE: GUIDANCE SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT To achieve a missile capability that is commensurate with the long-range, high data-rate, target­ detection characteristics of the AN/ SPY-IA radar, an evolutionary upgrade of the existing STANDARD Missile-l was authorized. Designated STANDARD Missile-2, it adds a command mid­ course flight phase, thereby providing the AEGIS Combat System with increased intercept range and higher firepower . STANDARD Missile-2 with inertial midcourse guidance also provides upgraded TERRIER and TARTAR Combat Systems with a corresponding increase in capability. Terminal guidance accuracy has also been improved by incorporating a new homing receiver common to all STANDARD Missile-2 variants. INTRODUCTION The design evolved over a two-year period, during which frequent meetings were held to review every The development of STANDARD Missile-2 (SM-2) aspect of the signal processing and logic. During that began in the early 1970's, with General Dynamics/ time, the communication links had progressed to the Pomona as the Design Agent and APL as Technical point where hardware interface tests were being con­ Advisor. At the time, STANDARD Missile-l (SM-l) ducted to demonstrate ship system compatibility. was in production as the primary weapon for Fleet Prior to the beginning of flight testing at White air defense by TERRIER and TARTAR ships. The Sands Missile Range in 1975, a guidance section principal modification to SM-l envisioned at the out­ design model was supplied to APL for an assessment set was to add a midcourse guidance system consist­ of its performance. Hundreds of hours of tests were ing of communication links, a digital guidance com­ conducted in the Guidance System Evaluation Labo­ puter, and an inertial reference unit. These additions ratory. As that evaluation proceeded, SM-2 began to were incorporated as shown in Fig. 1. For terminal acquire a reputation as a highly accurate missile. The guidance, the original plan had been to use the exist­ results obtained in the APL tests were confirmed in ing SM-l scanning receiver. However, shortly after subsequent flight tests of SM-2 and an upgraded SM-l becoming the Naval Sea Systems Command AEGIS that also uses the new homing receiver. To date, both Project Manager in 1972, Rear Admiral W. E. Meyer missiles have achieved a sizable percentage of direct made the decision to include a new monopulse ter­ hits in intercepting target drones. minal homing receiver. Thus, the final SM-2 configu­ The development and deployment of SM-2 cannot ration consisted of a largely new guidance section, a realistically be a stopping point in providing the fu­ repackaged autopilot to accommodate the inertial ture Navy with an effective antiair warfare capabil­ reference unit, and the existing SM-l ordnance, pro­ ity. Because the threat has continued to increase, the pulsion, and steering control systems. initial SM-2, now designated Block I, is being im­ To accelerate the development of the new homing proved. Currently, Block II is in engineering develop­ receiver, General Dynamics/ Pomona and APL engi­ ment, with APL technical support being provided in neers embarked on an intensive cooperative effort. many areas, including guidance. SM -2 UPGRADE Figure 1 - STANDARD Missile-1 Communication linkS/Digital guidance computer (SM-1) showing STANDARD Missile- Monopulse receiver I / Inertial reference unit 2 (SM-2) additions. Evolutionary im­ provements to STANDARD Missile have been facilitated by the use of modular packaging. The SM-2 up­ grade consisted of a new guid­ -~ ance section and additions to the fmprncrf:---; autopilot/battery section, while R,dome I Gu;d,noe \ Au,op;lotlb'tte", Ro,ke'mo'o' S'eedng oon'<o1 other sections remained essen­ Seeker antenna Ordnance tially unchanged. Vo lullle 2, N Ulllber4, 1981 289 MISSILE GUIDANCE TECHNIQUES either target-reflected energy from shipboard illu­ mination or jamming energy emanating from the tar­ Semiactive Guidance get. The seeker consists of a gimballed antenna and a A feature common to both SM-l and SM~2 is an radar receiver that measures the angle of arrival of ability to "home," i.e., to guide either some or all of the received signal (Fig. 2). The seeker tracks the tar­ the flight by means of target-reflected energy. The get and provides information to the missile guidance source of this energy is a high power, continuous computer concerning the line-of-sight angle and the wave, shipboard radar illuminator. A portion of the closing velocity as determined from the Doppler fre­ illuminator signal is received directly by the missile quency. Using a proportional navigation steering for use as a Doppler frequency reference. To accom­ law, discussed below, the guidance computer gener­ plish this, the illuminator antenna combines a narrow ates steering commands that ideally keep the missile beam directed toward the target with a broad refer­ on a collision course with the target. ence beam that encompasses the missile throughout Semiactive, home-all-the-way guidance is used in flight (Fig. 2). This type of guidance is called "semi­ many missile systems throughout the world. Its pri­ active" because the transmitter and receiver, al­ mary advantage is that it provides moderately good though linked, are not colocated. area defense coverage, i.e., intercept range, by virtue A semiactive missile must also be able to home pas­ of high power ship-based or ground-based illumina­ sively on electronic countermeasures signals radiated tion combined with up-and-over flight trajectories. by the target. Such signals may be used to screen the (Such trajectories are achieved by launching the mis­ target-reflected signal or otherwise deceive the semi­ sile at a relatively steep angle and allowing it to climb active receiver. Home-on-jam processing is automati­ above the target early in flight so as to better main­ cally selected when the target skin return cannot be tain available kinematic energy.) One of the major identified and when incoherent energy is present limitations of home-all-the-way guidance is its rela­ whose frequency and angle of arrival are approxi­ tively low firepower, since one of only a few illumi­ mately correct. nators must be committed to a single target for the entire missile flight. A second limitation is illustrated Home-All-the-Way Guidance in Fig. 4, which shows the many signals that may be A home-all-the-way guidance ' policy is one in present at the missile's receiving antenna. Clearly, a which the missile derives its own steering commands missile receiver that must pick out the target signal throughout flight based on the processing of signals immediately after launch has a much more difficult received from the target. Such a policy requires that task than it would if acquisition could be delayed un­ the target be acquired either prior to or shortly after til later in flight. launch. Figure 3 illustrates the various phases in the firing of an SM-l, which uses home-all-the-way guid­ Midcourse Plus Terminal Guidance ance. On the launcher, the missile is provided with a Midcourse guidance implies an intermediate flight post-launch prediction of where it should look for phase in which an external source supplies sufficient the target in angle and Doppler frequency. Following information to allow the missile to guide or steer an unguided boost phase, the missile seeker acquires toward the target without having to home. Two types Missile Guidance System Figure 2 - Semiactive guidance concept. Both SM-1 and SM-2 em­ ploy continuous wave, semiactive guidance. The target is illumi­ Steering commands~-.:.-~ nated by highly pure, sinusoidal to autopilot RF energy that allows objects to be distinguished on the basis of their velocity by the Doppler shift of the reflected energy. Homing is semiactive in the sense that the transmitter, in this case a high power shipborne radar, and the missile receiver are linked but not colocated. A passive homing ca­ pability is also provided to cope with possible jamming by the tar­ get. The combination of the on­ board homing receiver and the steerable front antenna is known as a "seeker." In addition to target tracking, the seeker supplies in­ formation to the guidance compu­ ter for computing missile steering commands. 290 Johns Hopkins APL Technical Digest Endgame efficiently to engage a larger number of targets. If the • Target detection by fuze • Warhead detonation missile has the kinematic capability and if the mid­ course trajectory control is sufficiently accurate, then -C.,r\'/,:)) a small target can be engaged at a longer range than ~-Y~' would be possible if seeker acquisition were required Homing Phase early in flight, as in the home-all-the-way case. • Missile homes to target • Semiactive or home-on-jam The shorter missile-to-target propagation distance guidance at the start of the terminal homing phase also tends to enhance the target return relative to some of the sources of interference shown in Fig. 4. In particular, Midcourse Phase (SM-2 only) the missile has a much better chance of "seeing" the • Missile flies to vicinity of target target in the presence of standoff jamming following • Guidance intelligence supplied by ship a period of midcourse guidance than it would imme­ diately after launch. L Boost Phase 1;'~ ( • Missile achieves supersonic speed ~ • Unguided flight STANDARD MISSILE-2 Initial ization MIDCOURSE GUIDANCE • Missile on launcher • Initialization data supplied by ship Midcourse guidance has been implemented in SM-2 by adding to SM-I an inertial reference unit together Figure 3 - STANDARD Missile operational sequence. On the launcher, the SM-1 is supplied with target acquisition with missile-ship communication links. The inertial data and begins homing shortly after the unguided boost reference unit consists of an instrument package cou­ phase of flight.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Prepared by Textore, Inc. Peter Wood, David Yang, and Roger Cliff November 2020
    AIR-TO-AIR MISSILES CAPABILITIES AND DEVELOPMENT IN CHINA Prepared by TextOre, Inc. Peter Wood, David Yang, and Roger Cliff November 2020 Printed in the United States of America by the China Aerospace Studies Institute ISBN 9798574996270 To request additional copies, please direct inquiries to Director, China Aerospace Studies Institute, Air University, 55 Lemay Plaza, Montgomery, AL 36112 All photos licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license, or under the Fair Use Doctrine under Section 107 of the Copyright Act for nonprofit educational and noncommercial use. All other graphics created by or for China Aerospace Studies Institute Cover art is "J-10 fighter jet takes off for patrol mission," China Military Online 9 October 2018. http://eng.chinamil.com.cn/view/2018-10/09/content_9305984_3.htm E-mail: [email protected] Web: http://www.airuniversity.af.mil/CASI https://twitter.com/CASI_Research @CASI_Research https://www.facebook.com/CASI.Research.Org https://www.linkedin.com/company/11049011 Disclaimer The views expressed in this academic research paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the U.S. Government or the Department of Defense. In accordance with Air Force Instruction 51-303, Intellectual Property, Patents, Patent Related Matters, Trademarks and Copyrights; this work is the property of the U.S. Government. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights Reproduction and printing is subject to the Copyright Act of 1976 and applicable treaties of the United States. This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This publication is provided for noncommercial use only.
    [Show full text]
  • Winning the Salvo Competition Rebalancing America’S Air and Missile Defenses
    WINNING THE SALVO COMPETITION REBALANCING AMERICA’S AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSES MARK GUNZINGER BRYAN CLARK WINNING THE SALVO COMPETITION REBALANCING AMERICA’S AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSES MARK GUNZINGER BRYAN CLARK 2016 ABOUT THE CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND BUDGETARY ASSESSMENTS (CSBA) The Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments is an independent, nonpartisan policy research institute established to promote innovative thinking and debate about national security strategy and investment options. CSBA’s analysis focuses on key questions related to existing and emerging threats to U.S. national security, and its goal is to enable policymakers to make informed decisions on matters of strategy, security policy, and resource allocation. ©2016 Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. All rights reserved. ABOUT THE AUTHORS Mark Gunzinger is a Senior Fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. Mr. Gunzinger has served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Forces Transformation and Resources. A retired Air Force Colonel and Command Pilot, he joined the Office of the Secretary of Defense in 2004. Mark was appointed to the Senior Executive Service and served as Principal Director of the Department’s central staff for the 2005–2006 Quadrennial Defense Review. Following the QDR, he served as Director for Defense Transformation, Force Planning and Resources on the National Security Council staff. Mr. Gunzinger holds an M.S. in National Security Strategy from the National War College, a Master of Airpower Art and Science degree from the School of Advanced Air and Space Studies, a Master of Public Administration from Central Michigan University, and a B.S. in chemistry from the United States Air Force Academy.
    [Show full text]
  • Missiles OUTLOOK
    SPECIFICATIONS Missiles OUTLOOK/ GENERAL DATA AIRFRAME GUIDANCE OUTLOOK/ POWERPLANT SPECIFICATIONS MAX. MAX. SPAN, BODY LAUNCH MAX. RANGE STATUS/OUTLOOK/REMARKS DESIGNATION/NAME LENGTH WINGS OR DIAMETER WEIGHT CONTRACTOR TYPE NO. MAKE & MODEL (FT.) FINS (FT.) (FT.) (LB.) (NAUT. MI.) AIR-TO-AIR CHUNG-SHAN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (CSIST), Taoyuan, Taiwan Skysword 1 (Tien Chien 1) 9.8 2.1 0.42 196.4 — IR 1 X solid propellant 9.7 In service with Taiwan air force since 1993. Skysword 2 (Tien Chien 2) 11.8 2 0.62 396.8 — Active radar 1 X solid propellant 32.4 In service with Taiwan air force since 1996. DENEL (PTY.) LTD., Pretoria, South Africa OPERATORS SATELLITE A-Darter 9.8 1.6 0.54 195.8 Denel IIR 1 X solid propellant — Fifth-generation technology demonstrator. Likely co-development with Brazil. COMMERCIAL R-Darter 11.9 2.1 0.53 264 Denel Radar 1 X solid propellant — Development completed 2000. For South African Air Force Cheetah and Gripen aircraft. U-Darter 9.6 1.67 0.42 210 Denel Two-color, IR 1 X solid propellant — First revealed in 1988; similar to Magic. Entered production in 1994. In use on South African Air Force Cheetah and Impala aircraft. DIEHL BGT DEFENSE, Uberlingen, Germany COMMERCIAL AIM-9L/I-1 Sidewinder 9.4 2.1 0.4 189 Diehl BGT Defense IR 1 X solid propellant — Upgraded and refurbished. IRIS-T 9.7 — 0.4 196 Diehl BGT Defense IIR 1 X solid propellant — In production. SATELLITE OPERATORS SATELLITE MBDA MISSILE SYSTEMS (BAE Systems, EADS, Finmeccanica), London, UK; Vélizy, France; Rome, Italy Aspide 12.1 3.4 0.67 479 Alenia Semiactive radar, homing 1 X solid propellant 43 In service.
    [Show full text]
  • Air-Directed Surface-To-Air Missile Study Methodology
    H. T. KAUDERER Air-Directed Surface-to-Air Missile Study Methodology H. Todd Kauderer During June 1995 through September 1998, APL conducted a series of Warfare Analysis Laboratory Exercises (WALEXs) in support of the Naval Air Systems Command. The goal of these exercises was to examine a concept then known as the Air-Directed Surface-to-Air Missile (ADSAM) System in support of Navy Overland Cruise Missile Defense. A team of analysts and engineers from APL and elsewhere was assembled to develop a high-fidelity, physics-based engineering modeling process suitable for understanding and assessing the performance of both individual systems and a “system of systems.” Results of the initial ADSAM Study effort served as the basis for a series of WALEXs involving senior Flag and General Officers and were subsequently presented to the (then) Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology. (Keywords: ADSAM, Cruise missiles, Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense, Modeling and simulation, Overland Cruise Missile Defense.) INTRODUCTION In June 1995 the Naval Air Systems Command • Developing an analytical methodology that tied to- (NAVAIR) asked APL to examine the Air-Directed gether a series of previously distinct, “stovepiped” Surface-to-Air Missile (ADSAM) System concept for high-fidelity engineering models into an integrated their Overland Cruise Missile Defense (OCMD) doc- system that allowed the detailed analysis of a “system trine. NAVAIR was concerned that a number of impor- of systems” tant air defense–related decisions were being made
    [Show full text]
  • Spacecraft Guidance Techniques for Maximizing Mission Success
    Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies 5-2014 Spacecraft Guidance Techniques for Maximizing Mission Success Shane B. Robinson Utah State University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd Part of the Mechanical Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Robinson, Shane B., "Spacecraft Guidance Techniques for Maximizing Mission Success" (2014). All Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 2175. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/2175 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SPACECRAFT GUIDANCE TECHNIQUES FOR MAXIMIZING MISSION SUCCESS by Shane B. Robinson A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Mechanical Engineering Approved: Dr. David K. Geller Dr. Jacob H. Gunther Major Professor Committee Member Dr. Warren F. Phillips Dr. Charles M. Swenson Committee Member Committee Member Dr. Stephen A. Whitmore Dr. Mark R. McLellan Committee Member Vice President for Research and Dean of the School of Graduate Studies UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY Logan, Utah 2013 [This page intentionally left blank] iii Copyright c Shane B. Robinson 2013 All Rights Reserved [This page intentionally left blank] v Abstract Spacecraft Guidance Techniques for Maximizing Mission Success by Shane B. Robinson, Doctor of Philosophy Utah State University, 2013 Major Professor: Dr. David K. Geller Department: Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Traditional spacecraft guidance techniques have the objective of deterministically min- imizing fuel consumption.
    [Show full text]
  • Former Warsaw Pact Ammunition Handbook, Vol 3
    NATO Explosive Ordnance Disposal Centre of Excellence FORMER WARSAW PACT AMMUNITION HANDBOOK VOLUME 3 Air Forces Ammunition Aerial projectiles, bombs, rockets and missiles TRENČÍN 2019 Slovak Republic For Official Use Only Explosive Ordnance Disposal Centre of Excellence FORMER WARSAW PACT AMMUNITION HANDBOOK VOLUME 3 Air Forces Ammunition Aerial projectiles, bombs, rockets and missiles For Official Use Only Explosive Ordnance Disposal Centre of Excellence The NATO Explosive Ordnance Centre of Excellence (NATO EOD COE) supports the efforts of the Alliance in the areas of training and education, information sharing, doctrine development and concepts validation. Published by NATO EOD Centre of Excellence Ivana Olbrachta 5, 911 01,Trenčín, Slovak Republic Tel. + 421 960 333 502, Fax + 421 960 333 504 www.eodcoe.org Former Warsaw Pact Ammunition Handbook VOL 3 – Edition II. ISBN 978-80-89261-81-9 © EOD Centre of Excellence. All rights reserved 2019 No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner without the written permission of the publisher, except in the case brief quotations embodied in articles and reviews. For Official Use Only Explosive Ordnance Disposal Centre of Excellence Foreword Even though in areas of current NATO operations the insurgency is vastly using the Home Made Explosive as the main charge for emplaced IEDs, our EOD troops have to cope with the use of the conventional munition in any form and size all around the world. To assist in saving EOD Operators’ lives and to improve their effectiveness at munition disposal, it is essential to possess the adequate level of experience and knowledge about the respective type of munition.
    [Show full text]
  • Missile Guidance and Control
    CHAPTER 4 MISSILE GUIDANCE AND CONTROL INTRODUCTION in the interest of terminology standardization and to assist common understanding, we shall call the In the preceding chapters you learned that the complete system within a missile that steers and essential parts a guided missile needs to perform stabilizes it a guidance and control system. properly are: Depending on your experience with missiles, you 1. Airframe and control surfaces. may take exception to this designation. And if you 2. Propulsion system. do, there is good reason for it. The reason is shown 3. Warhead system. in figure 4-1. For example, if you have worked on 4. Guidance and control system. the Tartar or Terrier missiles you will consider the In addition, in chapter 2 you studied the basic fire system that guides and controls a missile to be its control problem, and learned how some of the steering system. On the other hand, a Talos GMM forces of nature affect the trajectory of a guided would call it a guidance and control system. We missile as it flies to its intended target. In chapter 3 will stick with the latter designation - not because you learned how wings and fins steer a missile and we favor Talos but because most manuals, and keep it pointed along its flight path. The use of many Navy publications, use this term. interior control devices by missiles without exterior control surfaces (or limited ones) was described SUBSYSTEMS AND COMPONENTS briefly. The different types of guidance systems used in missiles are inertial, command, beam-rider, In figure 4-2 we show that the complete system and homing guidance.
    [Show full text]
  • Defense Primer: Ground Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) Capabilities
    November 10, 2020 Defense Primer: Ground Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) Capabilities Figure 1. Notional GBSD Launch Status of Minuteman III MMIII first entered service around 1970 and has undergone several life extension programs over the past 50 years, the most recent of which occurred in the late 2000s and included a replacement booster and missile guidance computer. In the next decade, both of these components may face reliability concerns as they reach the end of their intended lifespan, known as aging out, as indicated in Figure 2. A 2016 Pentagon study recommended replacing MMIII rather than conducting another life extension. The study concluded that the replacement system (GBSD) would meet current and expected threats, maintain the industrial base, insert more reliable technology, produce a modular weapon system concept, and reduce life cycle cost. Source: https://www.northropgrumman.com/GBSD/ Figure 2. Projected Decrease in Operational Minuteman III Missiles On September 8, 2020, the United States Air Force awarded Northrop Grumman Corporation a $13.3 billion contract to develop a new nuclear missile, the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD), intended to replace the 50-year old Minuteman III (MMIII) Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM). (For details on the U.S. nuclear force structure, see CRS Report FL33640, U.S Strategic Nuclear Forces: Background, Developments, and Issues, by Amy Woolf.) MMIII has been deployed as the ground-based leg of the U.S. nuclear forces structure (the “Triad”) since 1970. The Air Force expects GBSD to begin replacing MMIII in 2029. As the missile moves toward production and deployment, Source: Mark Gunzinger, Carl Rehberg, and Gillian Evans, Sustaining issues for Congress include whether to authorize and the US Nuclear Deterrent: The LRSO and GBSD, Center for appropriate funding for this program and, if so, to provide Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.
    [Show full text]
  • IJESRT INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL of ENGINEERING SCIENCES & RESEARCH TECHNOLOGY a LITERATURE STUDY on COMMAND to LINE of SIGHT MISSILE SYSTEM Ramakrishna G*1, G.K.D
    ISSN: 2277-9655 [Ramakrishna* et al., 7(1): January, 2018] Impact Factor: 5.164 IC™ Value: 3.00 CODEN: IJESS7 IJESRT INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING SCIENCES & RESEARCH TECHNOLOGY A LITERATURE STUDY ON COMMAND TO LINE OF SIGHT MISSILE SYSTEM Ramakrishna G*1, G.K.D. Prasanna Venkatesan 2 * Faculty of ECE, Indian Naval Academy, Ezhimala, India DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1147484 ABSTRACT The aim of this paper is to explain the CLOS (Command to Line of Sight) Missile Systems in detail. The includes the concept behind it, the technology used and the applications in modern warfare. While the paper will largely deal with CLOS guidance, the theory behind basic functioning of a guided weapon/missile will also be discussed. The MCLOS (Manual Command to Line of Sight), SACLOS (Semi Automatic Command to Line of Sight), and ACLOS (Automatic Command to Line of Sight) are also presented along with their applications. KEYWORDS: ACLOS, MCLOS, SACLOS I. INTRODUCTION A Guided weapon may be described briefly as a weapon system which the warhead is delivered by an unmanned guided vehicle. Guided missiles have only been in practical use since the advent of World War II. It is because the technology has enabled the invention of the final product has been around for a lot longer. From the oldest of discoveries, like that of gunpowder in the 1st millennium BC by the Chinese to the rapid advances in the field of science, they have all been required to the practical enabling of the concept of guided missile systems [1][2]. The Germans were the first to field guided weapons with the use of V1 guided bomb and the V2 rocket.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C) Efficient, Responsive, and Effective
    Space Transportation Systems National Aeronautics and Space Administration Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C) Efficient, Responsive, and Effective The GN&C capability is a critical enabler of • Navigation — system architecture trade every launch vehicle and spacecraft system. studies, sensor selection and modeling, posi- At-A-Glance Marshall applies a robust, responsive, team- tion/orientation determination software (filter) Guidance, navigation, and control capabilities oriented approach to the GN&C design, develop- development, architecture trade studies, auto- will be needed for today’s launch and tomor- ment, and test capabilities. From initial concept matic rendezvous and docking (AR&D), and row’s in-space applications. Marshall has through detailed mission analysis and design, Batch estimation — all mission phases. developed a GN&C capability with experience hardware development and test, verification and • Control — algorithms, vehicle and control directly supporting projects and serving as validation, and mission operations, the Center system requirements and specifications, a supplier and partner to industry, DOD, and can provide the complete end-to-end GN&C stability analyses, and controller design, academia. To achieve end-to-end develop- development and test — or provide any portion modeling and simulation. ment, this capability leverages tools such as of it — for launch vehicles or spacecraft systems the Flight Robotics Lab, specialized software • Sensor Hardware — selection, closed for any NASA mission. Recognized as the tools, and the portable SPRITE small satellite loop testing and qualification; design, build, Agency’s lead and a world-class developer of payload integration environment. The versatile and calibrate specialized sensors. Earth-to-orbit and in-space stages for GN&C, team also provides an anchor and resource Marshall is a key developer of in-space transpor- for government “smart buyer” oversight of tation, spacecraft control, automated rendezvous future space system acquisition, helping to and capture techniques, and testing.
    [Show full text]
  • Ballistic Missile Defense Guidance and Control Issues
    Science & Global Security, 1998, Volume 8, pp. 99-124 © 1998 OPA (Overseas Publishers Association) Reprints available directly from the publisher Amsterdam B.V. Photocopying permitted by license only Published under license by Gordon and Breach Science Publishers SA Printed in the United States of America Ballistic Missile Defense Guidance and Control Issues Paul Zarchana Ballistic targets can be more difficult to hit than aircraft targets. If the intercept takes place out of the atmosphere and if no maneuvering is taking place, the ballistic target motion can be fairly predictable since the only force acting on the target is that of grav- ity. In all cases an exoatmospheric interceptor will need fuel to maneuver in order to hit the target. The long engagement times will require guidance and control strategies which conserve fuel and minimize the acceleration levels for a successful intercept. If the intercept takes place within the atmosphere, the ballistic target is not as predict- able because asymmetries within the target structure may cause it to spiral. In addi- tion, the targets’ high speed means that very large decelerations will take place and appear as a maneuver to the pursuing endoatmospheric interceptor. In this case advanced guidance and control strategies are required to insure that the target can be hit even when the missile is out maneuvered. This tutorial will attempt to highlight the major guidance and control challenges facing ballistic missile defense. PREDICTING WHERE THE TARGET WILL BE Before an interceptor can be launched at a ballistic target, a sensor is first required to track the threat. For example, if the sensor is a ground radar, the range and angle from the radar to the target are measured.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of the U.S. Intercontinental Ballistic Missile Force
    CHILDREN AND FAMILIES The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that EDUCATION AND THE ARTS helps improve policy and decisionmaking through ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT research and analysis. HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE This electronic document was made available from INFRASTRUCTURE AND www.rand.org as a public service of the RAND TRANSPORTATION Corporation. INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS LAW AND BUSINESS NATIONAL SECURITY Skip all front matter: Jump to Page 16 POPULATION AND AGING PUBLIC SAFETY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Support RAND Purchase this document TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY Browse Reports & Bookstore Make a charitable contribution For More Information Visit RAND at www.rand.org Explore RAND Project AIR FORCE View document details Limited Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non-commercial use only. Unauthorized posting of RAND electronic documents to a non-RAND website is prohibited. RAND electronic documents are protected under copyright law. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please see RAND Permissions. This product is part of the RAND Corporation monograph series. RAND monographs present major research findings that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND mono- graphs undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity. C O R P O R A T I O N The Future of the U.S. Intercontinental Ballistic Missile Force Lauren Caston, Robert S.
    [Show full text]